After trying to programm a certain growth routine I asked myself how come a certain percentage grows like intended while others fail their growth routine, I mean if you deactivate brownian motion and every bot has the same starting conditions how come that not all either do it right or all fail but rather a percentage fails and a percentage succeeds?Any thought on that?

After trying to programm a certain growth routine I asked myself how come a certain percentage grows like intended while others fail their growth routine, I mean if you deactivate brownian motion and every bot has the same starting conditions how come that not all either do it right or all fail but rather a percentage fails and a percentage succeeds?Any thought on that?

I'd put it on luck, some are just lucky enough to grow, come in front of a veggie and some others are just unlucky.

At num o you mean this includes the birthtie? (cause like I said I can remove all tie binding in that bot but it still the same result)

At peter: luck would mean that there are certain "random" factors each bot suffers, but like I asked when brownian motion is removed what are these random factors?Is there something like static in the memory locations? I rememeber vaguely some talk about such an idea.

At num o you mean this includes the birthtie? (cause like I said I can remove all tie binding in that bot but it still the same result)

Yes, that would include the birth tie. The unpredictableness comes from how ties are simulated-- as damped springs. Damped springs are notoriously difficult to simulate in a physics simulation (like Darwinbots) because you're simulating a second order ODE with numerical integration methods. That is, the equation:

x''(t) = x(t) * -k + x'(t) * -b

Note that it's an equation that relates the second order derivative to the first and actual function. Yikes!

So the moral of the story is, especially with MB, you need to provide some time and space as a "wiggle room", to allow the ties to settle in to a stable configuration.

At peter: luck would mean that there are certain "random" factors each bot suffers, but like I asked when brownian motion is removed what are these random factors?Is there something like static in the memory locations? I rememeber vaguely some talk about such an idea.

Those random factors are simply said the phycics in ths sim, including tie-phycics, I think Numsgil is more of an expert about it, as he has to make them too for DB3. So well let him answer, his answers are probably better . He knows what really matters.

Quote from: Numsgil

Note that it's an equation that relates the second order derivative to the first and actual function. Yikes!

I haven't got a clue where you're talking about, but yikes it sounds like it is even a rather small part of the whole phycics.

Quote from: Numsgil

So the moral of the story is, especially with MB, you need to provide some time and space as a "wiggle room", to allow the ties to settle in to a stable configuration.

Especially the time is a troubling factor, in becoming a MB the first few cycles any movement could do strange things, haven't coded a real strong MB, but with stupido(posted in starting gate) it was clear in the it needed to settle(and he's really simple), some F1 or F2 bots already conquered the field .

Ok, I just looked of the multi-bot, could have seen this earlier, and well as I look you are every generation changing the angle in aimdx or aimdx, in ties it works better if you use an angle from the tie, (*.fixang) that way the angle will be measured from the tie. You could also use *.fixleng so make set a lenght of the tie.

In fact taking aimdx or aimsx you're taking a little chance that it could go wrong, not a big chance but it could screw some things up. Sometimes the tiephycics just seem to need little to let it go wrong, there is an enormous lot of power in those ties, little movement could invoke a lot of phycics sometimes.

Maybe I am going figure out how it works and abuse it

Quote

For DB3, I'll implement some actual joints, so we won't have these sorts of issues.

Nice, he wait how does it work then in DB 2 the ties are connected to the bot and in a multibot the angle gets stuck after awhile. Well that has to need some kind of joint doesn't it. It is connected to some place.

if your trying to make some structured mb thats arnt kust straigt lines ask Py they have some idea about activating certain genes if they have a certain id given to them bu their parents (in the cas of ants that would be the queen ant)

Well PY isn't active on the forum, but even with very simple multibots it helps to set a 'head' and 'body' part, to make clear whitch part decides everything. Hmm, you said ant-bots I am going to take a look and learn something about it, maybe their id-system could be interesting for multi-bots.